No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cisco Web Security Appliance vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Web Security Appliance
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
20th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
31st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of Cisco Web Security Appliance is 2.0%, down from 2.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 0.8%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cisco Web Security Appliance2.0%
Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)0.8%
Other97.2%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Vusa Ndlovu - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Solution Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Advanced protection features offer robust security while integration process presents challenges
With the WebAssign integration, it is not easy when I am integrating policies within the company, especially with NAND and wireless policies. The challenge arises when traffic is blocked from either wireless or wired connections. Although implementing it as a standalone is quicker, integrating BYOD with Cisco I and FTB can be tiring. Once it is done correctly, the functionality and reports become valuable, although the implementation part can still be challenging.
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy GM - IT at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Designed to provide comprehensive and secure internet access with high visibility into users
After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with its own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The setup was very easy and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Web Security Appliance is the provided anti-malware functionality and URL categorization. I can block access to malicious websites. 99 percent of the cases are related to a malicious website. If I cannot browse those malicious websites, then we are 99 percent protected."
"It's most valuable feature is its convenience."
"Cisco regularly upgrades features for the customer's security requirements."
"It's a very easy-to-use product and everything is working without any issue with the appliance."
"The product is stable."
"The deployment process is very simple."
"The most valuable features is of the solution is that it is user-friendly and we get good web security from it."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
"The most significant aspect is the control it offers over internet traffic, like managing computer access to specific sites such as Facebook. I find particular value in its ability to control the depth of internal traffic, enabling actions like blocking specific file extensions on social media or specific IPs. This control by categories is a standout feature for us in Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"The solution is not very compatible with other products."
"They need a better graphical interface, and they need a better ISE mechanism."
"As Cisco Web Security Appliance is eight years old, though it's simple to access its UI, the UI needs a little bit of updating. If it could be more interactive similar to the latest gen solutions, that would improve the product. Adding a few more integrations would also make Cisco Web Security Appliance better."
"The solution needs to be more user-friendly and easier to navigate."
"Setting up Cisco Web Security Appliance is highly complex and it takes about a week. We have to connect it to the Active Directory and configure all the policies for end users. It takes a long time to configure rules for our company data like port forwarding and separating the public and local components."
"If you're a customer with a lot of sites, then an on-prem solution like WSA is not a good option."
"During the setup, we had issues with updating the rules."
"There are occasional delays in customer support but it's a minor thing."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with their own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products."
"The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"At the time, licensing fees were paid on an annual basis."
"I know from the manager that the price is too high and that other solutions offer the same features for less."
"I rate Cisco WSA a seven out of ten since it is costly."
"I rate Cisco WSA a seven out of ten since it is costly."
"When you compare the price of this solution to the price of FortiGate, it's high."
"Licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"The licensing options begin with 100 users and this is a high threshold for smaller networks."
"This is an expensive solution."
"I rate the product pricing a five or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten."
"It is one of the reason for choosing it over other available products. However, recently, this year, there have been recurring concerns. I believe we might consider migrating to another solution."
"The solution’s pricing is cheaper than any other solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Construction Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
5%
Construction Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise12
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Web Security Appliance?
Comparing with other products, Cisco has more functionality, but pricing is a challenge. Cisco is not a product for small companies due to its pricing. Cisco has been in business for a long time, r...
What needs improvement with Cisco Web Security Appliance?
With the WebAssign integration, it is not easy when I am integrating policies within the company, especially with NAND and wireless policies. The challenge arises when traffic is blocked from eithe...
What is your primary use case for Cisco Web Security Appliance?
The user interface that I usually provide for the web app includes malware protection, URL filtering, data loss prevention (DLP), and advanced threat analytics. This is how I typically implement us...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Cisco WSA, Cisco Web Security
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

New South Wales Rural Fire Service, Caixa Seguradora
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Web Security Appliance vs. Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.